Vatican responds , the Holy See attempted to frustrate an inquiry is unfounded

Nodin

Min wrote: »

No, Father Brian D'arcy on the Marian Finucane show said this was about a problem about defrocking a priest and not being able to.
I don't know the technicalities but this is what was said about that.

"Father Brian D'arcy on the Marian Finucane show"....and sure who could ask for a higher authority than the man who wanted Clash albums banned, yapping on a talk show.

hatrickpatrick

Does the Catholic Church in Ireland WANT to survive, or does it have a death wish?

Seriously, there are times when humble humility are the only way out, and the church badly, badly needs to learn this.
Defensive word play and "we regret these events, BUT..." simply won't be tolerated much longer by their followers.

The church reminds me of many other entities in the world which simply have no grasp whatsoever about PR. One wonders if this is because they were so used to unquestioning compliance in the past that they never had the need to learn about the press and how to handle their image?

It amazes me when some people say things like "you're all church haters, NOTHING will satisfy you" and similar remarks.

All I want is an apology. Not a defensive apology, not a reputation saving apology, not a watered down apology, not a conditional apology. If the Vatican wrote a very simple two or three sentence piece to be read out at mass that in itself would be a huge step forward.

"We're sorry. We f*cked up, we have no excuses, it was wrong, we make no attempt whatsoever to justify or belittle what we did, we will assist the Irish authorities fully with their enquiries, and [most importantly] we will not water down our apology with exceptions or "buts". We're unconditionally sorry about what happened and we're ashamed that it did."

That's personally all I'm looking for. I have yet to read any statement by the church which offers an unconditional apology without attaching "buts" or "howevers" to the end of it.

Sunnyisland

hattrick patrick wrote: »

Does the Catholic Church in Ireland WANT to survive, or does it have a death wish?

Seriously, there are times when humble humility are the only way out, and the church badly, badly needs to learn this.
Defensive word play and "we regret these events, BUT..." simply won't be tolerated much longer by their followers.

The church reminds me of many other entities in the world which simply have no grasp whatsoever about PR. One wonders if this is because they were so used to unquestioning compliance in the past that they never had the need to learn about the press and how to handle their image?

It amazes me when some people say things like "you're all church haters, NOTHING will satisfy you" and similar remarks.

All I want is an apology. Not a defensive apology, not a reputation saving apology, not a watered down apology, not a conditional apology. If the Vatican wrote a very simple two or three sentence piece to be read out at mass that in itself would be a huge step forward.

"We're sorry. We f*cked up, we have no excuses, it was wrong, we make no attempt whatsoever to justify or belittle what we did, we will assist the Irish authorities fully with their enquiries, and [most importantly] we will not water down our apology with exceptions or "buts". We're unconditionally sorry about what happened and we're ashamed that it did."

That's personally all I'm looking for. I have yet to read any statement by the church which offers an unconditional apology without attaching "buts" or "however" to the end of it.

Yes that & an explanation WHY would any body cover up something as cruel and abusive that is child abuse, WHY.

KeithAFC

Perhaps people should now turn their back on Rome and see it for what it is. A corrupt organisation invented for the sole purpose to control and make money. Once you break free from the power of Rome, you will have more freedom.

Pherekydes

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

quiet you

Are you a bishop?

Duke Leonal Felmet

Min wrote: »

It is a good thing as there is yet another report as 96% of similar abuse cases happen outside the church where there are no reports.

Who claims absolute moral authority again?

I forget...

oldyouth

I'm of a mind to keep encouraging these pervert masters continue their indefensible propaganda. The more they speak, the more nails they put in their own coffin. Even the last few die hard supporters must be squirming tonight

Min

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Who claims absolute moral authority again?

I forget...

God?

Duke Leonal Felmet

Min wrote: »

God?

Good. And which institution is lead by an elected leader whose choice is claimed to be inspired by a certain celestial being?

Min wrote: »

The Vatican?

Yes, and because of their claims of a direct link to absolute authority and thus the keys to salvation, they were afforded an undeserved level of respect and power in our society, and across the world. With that power, they decided to commit terrible acts, and covered them up, whenever they could. This issue goes right to the very top of the Vatican, to Papa Ratzinger himself (The Pope who is elected under divine inspiration. The same divine inspiration that helped the Bible's authors, no less).

So who cares about whether Enda was right our not in this specific case, a statement like this was long overdue, in any case. I think it should have gone further, but maybe that is based on my distaste for institutions that protect child rapists.

You seem to like such institutions...

Why?

gerrycollins

has anyone spoken to their local priest about it?

I have and they are extremely embarrassed and sorry for something that they personally had nothing to do with and I know one or two priests who now wont do anything in the company of even teenagers without a parent of someone present.

Killer Pigeon

Min wrote: »

Enda Kenny was saying stuff to keep his anti-Catholic atheist allies in the Labour party happy like Eamon Gilmore, Pat Rabbitte, Ruairi Quinn, Ivan Bacik and so on...

The Holy See, says the government made claims without evidence, as the Cloyne report never stated the statement of the then papal nuncio on the framework document (as not being an official document) was used as an excuse to not deal with the abuse cases properly.

They say the bishops never looked for the document to be made official by the Vatican.

The reply from the Holy See looks reasoned.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0903/cloyne_vatican.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN6Wq-82hj0

pablomakaveli

Min wrote: »

Making claims without evidence is a dangerous assumption.

Prime did an investigation into abuse of children by catholic priests in africa.

Last night's Prime Time Investigates programme on RTÉ One exposed several cases of abuse across the continent.
In one case, the abuse continued until just five years ago.
Minister for Justice Alan Shatter has said he watched the programme with a sense of revulsion at the unspeakable catalogue of abuse against children it revealed.
'While the behaviour took place abroad, we have a solemn duty to do all that is within our power to ensure that perpetrators of this predatory abuse of children are brought to justice wherever it takes place.'
He said the law does provide in the Sexual Offences (Jurisdiction) Act, 1996, that in certain circumstances persons can be tried here for sexual offences against a child which are committed abroad.
The minister said he had been in contact with the Garda Commissioner about the matter.
The Superintendent in charge of the Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Investigation Unit is to be appointed to examine the programme.
In particular, the Superintendent will examine whether any criminal behaviour was disclosed which can be pursued in this jurisdiction, according to Minister Shatter.
The minister also said gardaí are liaising with the Health Service Executive about any child protection issues that arise in this jurisdiction from the presence here of a number of persons identified in the programme.
Meanwhile, Fr Eamon Aylward of the Irish Missionary Union said he was very shattered by last night's programme.
Asked this morning if he would like to see a Murphy style investigation into abuse of children by some missionaries, he said it would be difficult to investigate crimes in 83 different countries, but that in Ireland 99.9% cooperation with State authorities is in place.
In relation to informing African authorities of abuse, he said that would be complex and would depend on individual cases as questions regarding the ethos of different cultures can arise.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0524/abuse.html

Hope thats evidence enough.

Snakeblood

A Priest wrote: »

Meanwhile, Fr Eamon Aylward of the Irish Missionary Union said he was very shattered by last night's programme.
Asked this morning if he would like to see a Murphy style investigation into abuse of children by some missionaries, he said it would be difficult to investigate crimes in 83 different countries, but that in Ireland 99.9% cooperation with State authorities is in place.
In relation to informing African authorities of abuse, he said that would be complex and would depend on individual cases as questions regarding the ethos of different cultures can arise.

Best not to report it if it's complex, I suppose. And some places might be fine with banging kids so I guess that means the church can get right on it.

Liam Byrne

In all fairness, what guidelines DO you need to decide whether or not to report a sick f**k raping a kid ?

There is no decision to be made.

Anyone who looked over their shoulder to even REMOTELY consider a church position on this - whether official or unofficial - was wrong and complicit from that moment on.

Rabidlamb

So, no word on the return of the Nonce-io.
Oh dear.... what a pity .... nevermind.
I want a hardline response in the Dail now that hits the front page of every paper in the western world, someone has to take a stance against them, now is the time.

Min

Min wrote: »

[The Government] would be better off protecting children in the care of the state with 23 plus children dead over the past 10 years than thinking they can break the seal of the confessional.

+1 to that.

HalloweenJack

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0905/1224303498653.html

One bit of this stuck out for me:

Nowhere in its response, which runs to 25 pages and almost 11,000 words, is any of this addressed by the Vatican. Rather it takes issue with certain findings of the Cloyne report which might have been clarified had it co-operated with the commission, whose remit was extended from the Dublin diocese to cover Cloyne in 2009. It can hardly complain if its non-cooperation backfired.

Too bloody right. The Vatican are bitching at the Government over how the Government considered the document but if they had actually cooperated in the investigation, they could have cleared that up at the time, but then that'd mean they wouldn't have any more delaying or deflecting tactics.

They are an utter disgrace. They have no interest in justice for the abused, they just want to draw it out as long as they can so they don't have to face the consequences. Absolutely sickening. They remind me of those kids who sit with their eyes closed, fingers in their ears, yelling: "La-la-la-la, I am not listening!".

syklops

What I'd like to know is why it took the Holy See SIX weeks to come up with a response.

Biggins

syklops wrote: »

What I'd like to know is why it took the Holy See SIX weeks to come up with a response.

I assume they took their time to see where there was any possible holes in what was said against them and try use them to the best of their ability.
Twist and turn things, duck and dive, the usual antics we have come to expect from this organisation.
Its nothing new.

syklops

Biggins wrote: »

I assume they took their time to see where there was any possible holes in what was said against them and try use them to the best of their ability.
Twist and turn things, duck and dive, the usual antics we have come to expect from this organisation.
Its nothing new.

Well, I am sure thats what went on, but that it took six weeks, IMO, shows utter contempt for the Taoiseach, abuse sufferers and the Irish people by the vatican. And yes, the lower case 'v' is intentional.

token56

There are just so many things about this that annoy me. But beyond all this arguing over semantics and placing blame etc there just seems to be a lack of effort being put into writing the wrongs that have occurred. The vatican seems to be more interested in protecting its image than anything else. For any organisation that is supposed to embody everything we are told about Jesus very little effort seems to be made to actual live up to their own standards. I accept there are some good individuals here, priests, bishops etc who are trying but why hasn't the pope come over here personally to sympathise with the people who have been hurt as a representative of the church not in some semi political visit? The obvious answer is emotions are still very raw here and there is assured to be some backlash, but so what man up to the wrongs that have occurred and lead by example. I'm not in any way religious but I just can't stand the hypocrisy within this organisation.

Ghost Buster

Min wrote: »

Making claims without evidence is a dangerous assumption.

Thats called religion isnt it?

Teclo

syklops wrote: »

What I'd like to know is why it took the Holy See SIX weeks to come up with a response.

They don't do hysterical rants that can be spewed out after two minutes of malicious thought.

Ghost Buster

Teclo wrote: »

They don't do hysterical rants that can be spewed out after two minutes of malicious thought.

Indeed. It takes a while to circle the wagons, pass the buck and remain arrogantly dispassionate.

Snakeblood

Teclo wrote: »

They don't do hysterical rants that can be spewed out after two minutes of malicious thought.

Have you read the bible?

Ghost Buster

Snakeblood wrote: »

Have you read the bible?

The book about the King of hissy fits "Gawd"!!!!
Indeed.:D

prinz

token56 wrote: »

There are just so many things about this that annoy me. But beyond all this arguing over semantics and placing blame etc there just seems to be a lack of effort being put into writing the wrongs that have occurred.

Indeed the Govt haven't done anything concrete to correct the weaknesses identified in their position by the Cloyne Report when it comes to child safety at all. Both sides are taking the mickey.

Biggins

prinz wrote: »

...Both sides are taking the mickey.

Maybe - definitely one side has been for sure directly!
Now how about holding them accountable for it instead of putting up with more of their schite and PR word spinning crap - Some fcuking 'religion' they are running in Rome!
(It not, its an org that is made up of lawyers, MASSIVE property ownership popes, PR people, criminals and perverts. I don't think Jesus if he existed - had all the latter in mind if he spoke about a religion based around charity and treating ones fellow man as one would treat oneself!)

prinz

Biggins wrote: »

Maybe - definitely one side has been for sure directly! Now how about holding them accountable for it instead of putting up with more of their schite and PR word spinning crap -

I'd suggest holding both sides accountable for their respective failings - some fcuking state they are running in Ireland etc. Smoke and mirrors coming fromm both sides.

Ghost Buster

prinz wrote: »

I'd suggest holding both sides accountable for their respective failings - some fcuking state they are running in Ireland etc.

One side IS accountable and can be held accountable by every person over 18 . The other isnt and reckons it is above the law and not answerable to man but to a pretend being.
Can you spot which is which?